Zone1 Separation of Church and State?

[BreezeWood]

The burning bush is what is known as the Shekinah which every prophet 'sees' when God is near. Its like a wormhole that opens up in the prophets mind through which God communicates. It's the inspiration for the Magen David, the shield of David. Desert dwellers know something you don't.



Its translucent and transparent, encircled by many colors, like light refracted through a diamond. Moses happened to be looking at a bush, from afar, which made it seem like it was engulfed in a sparkling colorful fire. When Moses 'got closer' he realized that he was seeing the fire in his mind

And then he saw and heard God speak colorful image inspiring words that made no sound.

No one has to look for the burning bush. If you do what is right the 'burning bush', the Spirit of God that 'hovered over the waters' at the dawn of the creation of Heaven and earth, will find you.

that has a ring those in need would more than welcome ...

not those two - moses and abraham, false commandments - hereditary idolatry ... that is not from the heavens nor those that worship the opportunist to the detriment of others.

think jesus and those other exemplars, free spirits liberation theology, self determination - sparklers for everyone.

 

[hobelim]

that has a ring those in need would more than welcome ...

Then I hope that need is satisfied.

Its a circle encircled by the undulating colors of a rainbow with a multifaceted geometric pattern within thats not unlike a madala in motion appearing from somewhere beyond space and time.

In the Bible its translated as covered with many eyes but 'ayin, the Hebrew word for eye, also denotes color. So the truth is its not covered with many eyes, but with many luminous colors..

 

[NotfooledbyW]

The Republican Party’s Separation of Mind from Reason as a result of the Rightward Catholic Culture of Saint Ding. ….. continuation of paragraphs. ….
i thru v i nfbw 240820 Vsocas00876
vi thru vii. nfbw 240820 Vsocas00883
viii thru x. nfbw 240821 Vsocas00884
xi. thru xii. nfbw 240821 Vsocas00897
xiii thru xiv nfbw 240821 Vsocas00897
xv thru xviii. nfbw 240822 Vsicas00903

xv. Separation of Church and State? 240820 {post•845}. BackAgain said: The phrase “separation of church and state” doesn’t appear in the Constiturion. bckgn 240820 Ssocas00845


xvi. Separation of Church and State? 240822 {post•903}.

NotfooledbyW Aug’24 Vsocas inserted an excerpt on faith and reason:

A truly Catholic perception of Thomas Jefferson. by Donald J. D'Elia: Yet, Jefferson's false principles in philosophy and religion, which are essentially those of "modern man" in today's consenting-adult society, and his private scurrilities, must be an affront to real Christians. This truth is beyond opinion, despite Jefferson's transparent sincerity. The man why had "sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man" was himself the victim of the most dangerous tyranny of all: ignorance of the Word of God. For Jefferson could not, and modern Americans cannot, declare themselves independent of God's truth.

The Relevance of Thomas Jefferson
Library : The Relevance of Thomas Jefferson. by Donald J. D'Elia. Author of Faith & Reason. Christendom College Press, Fall 1977 ….. In this analysis of Thomas Jefferson, Dr. D 'Elia lays the groundwork for a truly Catholic perception of American history in general, in addition to unveiling an accurate portrait of the man. About : Trinity Communications. •¥•. nfbw 240822 Vsicas00903

xvii. America's Christian Heritage 170301 {post•1} ding Mar’17 Sachyz: The second best-selling book in the American colonies was the New England Primer. ••• Many of its selections were drawn from the King James Bible. dvng 170301 Sachyz00001


xviii. Separation of Church and State? 240822 {post•903}.

NotfooledbyW Aug’24 Vsocas: I need to draw your attention to paragraph xvii. This is where Saint ding celebrates the triumph of faith in unprovable facts as collected the biblical worldview, over faith in reason by the celebrating the reality that in colonial America children were indoctrinated by the church/state regime of King James

I reckon KJ is probably the monarch most famous for converting a Catholic book into a Protestant one leading to all kinds of wars beheadings, tortures and all the other kinds of abuses that come when a church is aligned with a state.

We can see continued abuses from church/state authoritarianism in the current Russian invasion of Ukraine as well as the suffering of women in America of church/state abortion bans, such has the ban enacted in Texas.

The Catholic Dr. D 'Elia attack on TJ can be read in paragraph xvi. D 'Elia tells us that TJ swore “upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man" with a big target being the Catholic Church in the history of Western Civilization,

It’s too bad President Jefferson is not here to defend our nation against the tyranny of a minority of the Catholic as mind expressed by the Catholic Dr. D 'Elia.

This story is about coming to the defense of Thomas Jefferson and the separation of church and state which is the foundation of our western liberal democracy.

Catholic Americans are split with more than half understanding the concept of separation of church and state with a high wall between them. But the low wall or no wall mindset is represented in the expectations of its most virulent right wing Catholic believers.

They must be stopped in November.

nfbw 240822 Vsicas00903

 

[ding]

Does anyone follow this guy's OCD formating

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Does anyone follow this guy's OCD formating

Why did you lie about Jefferson’s beliefs on his duty to God and desire for an eternal life with God. You’re a liar.

 

[ding]

Why did you lie about Jefferson’s beliefs on his duty to God and desire for an eternal life with God. You’re a liar.

Thomas Jefferson and many of his contemporaries understood
that the natural rights of man depended upon teleological considerations.
So viewed, and accepting the premise that man's goal is being
with his Creator for eternity, man has the duty to abide by His will
and directions, because they are necessary to satisfy man's duties.
Jefferson wrote that "the true office is to declare and enforce our
natural rights and duties."24 The existence of natural duties and the
relationship of rights to duties were quite apparent to Jefferson, and
anyone who has studied the man should realize that the only natural
duties Jefferson acknowledged were not to temporal kings, but to
the Creator.
James Madison was even more explicit that the source of rights
exists in man's duty to his Creator. Writing of the unalienable right
of religion in his Memorial and Remonstrance, he stated that the
right is unalienable
"because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards
the creator. It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator
such homeage, and such only, as he believes to be acceptable to
Him. His duty is precedent, both in order of time and in degree
of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society. Before any man
can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be
considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe: And
if a member of Civil Society, who enters into any subordinate
Association, must always do it with a reservation of his duty
to the general authority; much more must every man who becomes
a member of any particular Civil Society, do it with a
saving of his allegiance to the Universal Sovereign." 25
Another leading Virginian, George Mason, was equally clear in
asserting that the obligation of man to his Maker was the source of natural
rights. In 1772 he wrote:
"Now all acts of legislature apparently contrary to natural right
and justice, are, in our laws, and must be in the nature of
things, considered as void. The laws of nature are the laws of
God: A legislature must not obstruct our obedience to him from
whose punishments they cannot protect us. All human constitutions
which contradict His laws, we are in conscience
bound to disobey. Such have been the adjudications of our
courts of justice." 26
The imperative necessity of understanding ends and duties in
order to delineate natural rights was appreciated not only by Messrs.
Jefferson, Madison, and Mason, but also by Virginians generally in
our formative period. The members of the Virginia convention that
ratified the United States Constitution saw and stated that the natural
rights of conscience and religion are predicated upon an obligation
to God. They contended that it was because of "the duty which we
owe to our Creator," that "all men have an equal, natural and unalienable
right to the free exercise of religion according to the dictates
of conscience." 27

Founding Fathers were anti-atheist

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Thomas Jefferson and many of his contemporaries understood
that the natural rights of man depended upon teleological considerations.
So viewed, and accepting the premise that man's goal is being
with his Creator for eternity, man has the duty to abide by His will
and directions, because they are necessary to satisfy man's duties.
Jefferson wrote that "the true office is to declare and enforce our
natural rights and duties."24 The existence of natural duties and the
relationship of rights to duties were quite apparent to Jefferson, and
anyone who has studied the man should realize that the only natural
duties Jefferson acknowledged were not to temporal kings, but to
the Creator.
James Madison was even more explicit that the source of rights
exists in man's duty to his Creator. Writing of the unalienable right
of religion in his Memorial and Remonstrance, he stated that the
right is unalienable
"because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards
the creator. It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator
such homeage, and such only, as he believes to be acceptable to
Him. His duty is precedent, both in order of time and in degree
of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society. Before any man
can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be
considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe: And
if a member of Civil Society, who enters into any subordinate
Association, must always do it with a reservation of his duty
to the general authority; much more must every man who becomes
a member of any particular Civil Society, do it with a
saving of his allegiance to the Universal Sovereign." 25
Another leading Virginian, George Mason, was equally clear in
asserting that the obligation of man to his Maker was the source of natural
rights. In 1772 he wrote:
"Now all acts of legislature apparently contrary to natural right
and justice, are, in our laws, and must be in the nature of
things, considered as void. The laws of nature are the laws of
God: A legislature must not obstruct our obedience to him from
whose punishments they cannot protect us. All human constitutions
which contradict His laws, we are in conscience
bound to disobey. Such have been the adjudications of our
courts of justice." 26
The imperative necessity of understanding ends and duties in
order to delineate natural rights was appreciated not only by Messrs.
Jefferson, Madison, and Mason, but also by Virginians generally in
our formative period. The members of the Virginia convention that
ratified the United States Constitution saw and stated that the natural
rights of conscience and religion are predicated upon an obligation
to God. They contended that it was because of "the duty which we
owe to our Creator," that "all men have an equal, natural and unalienable
right to the free exercise of religion according to the dictates
of conscience." 27

Founding Fathers were anti-atheist

Repeating a lie does not change it to the truth.

• You are saying Thomas Jefferson accepted the premise that man's goal is being with his Creator for eternity

That is a lie, and you cannot respond to it because you must know that it’s a lie. Jefferson’s lifetime of written words prove it’s a lie.

• You are saying Thomas Jefferson believed he had a duty to abide by the God of Abraham’s will and directions,

Based on reading Thomas Jefferson writing that is pure bullshit.

Jefferson didn’t believe nature’s God, the creator revealed himself to man. So how in the hell can Jefferson know what his duty to God is Saint_Ding?

 

[ding]

Repeating a lie does not change it to the truth.

• You are saying Thomas Jefferson accepted the premise that man's goal is being with his Creator for eternity

That is a lie, and you cannot respond to it because you must know that it’s a lie. Jefferson’s lifetime of written words prove it’s a lie.

• You are saying Thomas Jefferson believed he had a duty to abide by the God of Abraham’s will and directions,

Based on reading Thomas Jefferson writing that is pure bullshit.

Jefferson didn’t believe nature’s God, the creator revealed himself to man. So how in the hell can Jefferson know what his duty to God is Saint_Ding?

History recorded...

Thomas Jefferson and many of his contemporaries understood
that the natural rights of man depended upon teleological considerations.
So viewed, and accepting the premise that man's goal is being
with his Creator for eternity, man has the duty to abide by His will
and directions, because they are necessary to satisfy man's duties.
Jefferson wrote that "the true office is to declare and enforce our
natural rights and duties."24 The existence of natural duties and the
relationship of rights to duties were quite apparent to Jefferson, and
anyone who has studied the man should realize that the only natural
duties Jefferson acknowledged were not to temporal kings, but to
the Creator.
James Madison was even more explicit that the source of rights
exists in man's duty to his Creator. Writing of the unalienable right
of religion in his Memorial and Remonstrance, he stated that the
right is unalienable
"because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards
the creator. It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator
such homeage, and such only, as he believes to be acceptable to
Him. His duty is precedent, both in order of time and in degree
of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society. Before any man
can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be
considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe: And
if a member of Civil Society, who enters into any subordinate
Association, must always do it with a reservation of his duty
to the general authority; much more must every man who becomes
a member of any particular Civil Society, do it with a
saving of his allegiance to the Universal Sovereign." 25
Another leading Virginian, George Mason, was equally clear in
asserting that the obligation of man to his Maker was the source of natural
rights. In 1772 he wrote:
"Now all acts of legislature apparently contrary to natural right
and justice, are, in our laws, and must be in the nature of
things, considered as void. The laws of nature are the laws of
God: A legislature must not obstruct our obedience to him from
whose punishments they cannot protect us. All human constitutions
which contradict His laws, we are in conscience
bound to disobey. Such have been the adjudications of our
courts of justice." 26
The imperative necessity of understanding ends and duties in
order to delineate natural rights was appreciated not only by Messrs.
Jefferson, Madison, and Mason, but also by Virginians generally in
our formative period. The members of the Virginia convention that
ratified the United States Constitution saw and stated that the natural
rights of conscience and religion are predicated upon an obligation
to God. They contended that it was because of "the duty which we
owe to our Creator," that "all men have an equal, natural and unalienable
right to the free exercise of religion according to the dictates
of conscience." 27

Founding Fathers were anti-atheist

 

[NotfooledbyW]

History recorded...

It’s a lie. And you are a liar..

You said you go by Jefferson’s words.

Then go by them.

Jefferson’s words you cited "the true office is to declare and enforce our. natural rights and duties." say nothing about natural rights coming from your Catholic idea of God or Jefferson’s duty to believe that his son Jesus Christ died on the cross so that he could have eternal salvation.

You’re absurdity is beyond comprehension, Saint_Ding for rational folk.

This is Jefferson’s full quote:

Our legislators are not sufficiently apprized of the rightful limits of their power; that their true office is to declare and enforce only our natural rights and duties, and to take none of them from us.

Thomas Jefferson

 

[ding]

It’s a lie. And you are a liar..

You said you go by Jefferson’s words.

Then go by them.

Jefferson’s words you cited "the true office is to declare and enforce our. natural rights and duties." say nothing about natural rights coming from your Catholic idea of God or Jefferson’s duty to believe that his son Jesus Christ died on the cross so that he could have eternal salvation.

You’re absurdity is beyond comprehension, Saint_Ding for rational folk.

This is Jefferson’s full quote:

Our legislators are not sufficiently apprized of the rightful limits of their power; that their true office is to declare and enforce only our natural rights and duties, and to take none of them from us.

Thomas Jefferson

A lie told often enough.... eh Vlad?

 

[TruthNotBS]

The Constitution prohibits the hierarchy of Churches/Religions from being involved in State/Federal government. Popes, bishops, priests, ministers are set apart from government. However, this separation does not apply to the laity. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states the vocation of the laity:

898 "By reason of their special vocation it belongs to the laity to seek the kingdom of God by engaging in temporal affairs and directing them according to God's will....

899 The initiative of lay Christians is necessary especially when the matter involves discovering or inventing the means for permeating social, political, and economic realities with the demands of Christian doctrine and life. This initiative is a normal element of the life of the Church….

People/citizens of faith are not only citizens of a nation, but are also citizens of the Kingdom of God. It is not only our right, but our duty to permeate the social, political, and economic realities within our governments.

If the laity decides to enact laws that favor Christians to the detriment of non-Christians, then that would be a violation of the separation between religion and state. The state shouldn't favor any one religion over another. It should protect the rights of Christians and others, to worship as they see fit, provided that doesn't include sacrificing virgins on an altar.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

The members of the Virginia convention that
ratified the United States Constitution saw and stated that the natural
rights of conscience and religion are predicated upon an obligation
to God. They contended that it was because of "the duty which we
owe to our Creator," that "all men have an equal, natural and unalienable
right to the free exercise of religion according to the dictates
of conscience." 27

Founding Fathers were anti-atheist

Who is Chester James Antieau to define the Creator of the Universe for you as the anthropomorphic version of a God that Catholics worship, Saint_Ding?

Why did you post that lie to our conversation three times now.

The members of the Virginia convention that were ratified the United States Constitution saw and stated that the natural rights of conscience and religion are predicated upon an obligation to God. They contended that it was because of "the duty which we owe to our Creator," that "all men have an opinion equal, natural and unalienable right to the free exercise of religion according to the dictates of conscience.​

Jefferson never said that he had a duty to the creator because he cannot have a duty a s created that did not reveal duties to human beings or a demanded to be loved and worshipped.

You are a liar.

 

[ding]

Who is Chester James Antieau to define the Creator of the Universe for you as the anthropomorphic version of a God that Catholics worship, Saint_Ding?

Why did you post that lie to our conversation three times now.

The members of the Virginia convention that were ratified the United States Constitution saw and stated that the natural rights of conscience and religion are predicated upon an obligation to God. They contended that it was because of "the duty which we owe to our Creator," that "all men have an opinion equal, natural and unalienable right to the free exercise of religion according to the dictates of conscience.​

Jefferson never said that he had a duty to the creator because he cannot have a duty a s created that did not reveal duties to human beings or a demanded to be loved and worshipped.

You are a liar.

They hated atheists.

 

[TruthNotBS]

Gentle disagreement. The Constitution does not in any way prohibit a priest or Pope or Deacon or minister or anybody else involved in the Church, who is a citizen of the United States and meets the residency requirements, from running for, being appointed to, or otherwise holding any public office. Many ordained ministers and at least two Catholic priests in fact have served in Congress.

The Founders wanted those in government to be people of faith and righteous morals but did not want any kind of theocracy, thus mandating no religious test for those serving at the federal level.

What the Constitution does prohibit is any organized religious group--Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Protestant etc.--from having any more authority in the federal government than any other citizens whether they are religious or not.

The few theocracies that existed at the colony/state level all dissolved themselves by the end of the 18th Century and no new theocracies were established. The closest to it was the Church of Latter Day Saints when they first settled in Utah but by the time Utah applied for statehood the theocracy was not law.

There's zero evidence that the Founding Fathers wanted all government officials to be religious. Good values don't necessarily correspond with someone's religious status or how devout they are to a particular religion.

A person can be ethical, civil, and humane, without being religious. Many of the founding fathers would've been considered secular, liberal heretics today. Thomas Jefferson wrote his own gospel, deleting all of the miracles from the text. Benjamin Franklin was an 18th-century secularist. George Washington was a 33rd-degree Mason. The name "Colombia" is the name of a goddess:

"By the time of the American Revolutionary War, Columbia had become a symbol of the new, independent country. In form, Columbia is a quasi-mythical, adult female personification of the United States and the values of the people who live there. She wears roman-styled robes which are pure white or red, white and blue."

Columbia | World War I Poster | Pritzker Military Museum & Library | Chicago

Explore the evolution of Columbia as a symbol of the United States.

www.pritzkermilitary.org

Washington DC is stock-full of occultic, masonic symbols and architecture. Our currency is as well:

Were there some traditional, more fundamentalist, conservative Christians amongst the signers of the US Constitution? Yes. But many of the well-known Founding Fathers weren't religious Christians at all. They would be condemned today as heretics or apostates.

The "In God We Trust" was added to our coins in the 1950s, in response to Soviet secularism. It was a way of saying, to the American working class that capitalism is pro-God and communism isn't. We trust in God,, they don't.

 

[Meriweather]

If the laity decides to enact laws that favor Christians to the detriment of non-Christians, then that would be a violation of the separation between religion and state. The state shouldn't favor any one religion over another. It should protect the rights of Christians and others, to worship as they see fit, provided that doesn't include sacrificing virgins on an altar.

First, I don't see favoring one faith/religion being as God's will. Second, I see the laity working within the boundaries of a secular government that was set up by the Founding Fathers of the United States.

All citizens--including citizens of faith (any faith) are meant to be involved in a democratic republic. When contemplating the will of God for all of his people, we can consider the following when making decisions: God is good...what bring about goodness. God is love...what is most loving (and don't forget love can also be tough love). God made us to be free (which might also mean taking on responsibility for oneself). God is ethical...what is the most ethical course to plan and to follow.

All of the above can be worked out without even advertising one religion/faith over another. My point is that people of faith do need to take part in our government.

 

[TruthNotBS]

First, I don't see favoring one faith/religion being as God's will. Second, I see the laity working within the boundaries of a secular government that was set up by the Founding Fathers of the United States.

All citizens--including citizens of faith (any faith) are meant to be involved in a democratic republic. When contemplating the will of God for all of his people, we can consider the following when making decisions: God is good...what bring about goodness. God is love...what is most loving (and don't forget love can also be tough love). God made us to be free (which might also mean taking on responsibility for oneself). God is ethical...what is the most ethical course to plan and to follow.

All of the above can be worked out without even advertising one religion/faith over another. My point is that people of faith do need to take part in our government.

You don't have to believe in a particular God or a God at all, period, to effectively serve the public good.

 

[Meriweather]

You don't have to believe in a particular God or a God at all, period, to effectively serve the public good.

That's not my point. My point is that Christians should not excuse themselves from taking part in our government. You might say the same to citizens who hold no belief in God. My point was directed at Christians being part of our/their secular government. All--including Christians--have a duty as citizens.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

That's not my point. My point is that Christians should not excuse themselves from taking part in our government.

No one is asking them to.

 

[Meriweather]

No one is asking them to.

That's my point. No one is standing in the way of them doing their duty as a US citizen. Therefore...be involved.

 

[BreezeWood]

My point was directed at Christians being part of our/their secular government. All--including Christians--have a duty as citizens.

of the many sins of the desert one of the greatest is abraham's hereditary idolatry -

all in the heavens are equal there are no christians, jews or muslims that is what those people need to understand and repair whatever that is that makes them believe they are distinguishable by the heavens because they are not.

meriweather's proposal is a corruption in religion not of the meaning of secular gov't they can not by their corruption possibly understand.